Agenda item - BH2017/00071- 150 Warren Road, Woodingdean, Brighton - Housholder Planning Consent

Roof alterations including roof extensions, raising of ridge height and installation of roof lights and solar panels to front and rear elevations. Erection of porch to side elevation, balcony to front elevation and associated works.

RECOMMENDATION – REFUSE

Ward Affected: Woodingdean

              Roof alterations including roof extensions, raising of ridge height and installation of roof lights ad solar panels to front and rear elevations. Erection of porch to side elevation, balcony to front elevation and associated works.

(1)          It was noted that this application had formed the subject of a site visit prior to the meeting.

              Officer Presentation

(2)          The Principal Planning Officer, Jonathan Puplett, introduced the scheme and gave a presentation by reference to plans, photographs and elevational drawings. It was considered that due to the siting of the dwelling, the proposal would not result in a loss of sunlight or daylight or appear overbearing due to its siting being sufficiently distant from neighbouring dwelling. However, the proposed rear access by reason of its elevated position constituted an unneighbourly development which would result in harmful overlooking and loss of privacy to 69 Chanel View Road and 148 Warren Road. This would be contrary to policy and refusal was therefore recommended.

              Public Speakers

(3)          Mr Mower, the applicant, spoke in support of his application. He stated that none of neighbours had objected to his application and that a letter of support had been submitted by one of the local ward councillors. Mr Mower showed photographs of properties which had received similar treatment in the locality without a negative impact, stating that the neighbouring street scene was diverse.

              Questions for Officers

(4)          Councillor Bennett sought confirmation of the ridge height of the proposed development and it was explained that this would be 1.1m higher than the existing. Councillor Bennett also sought confirmation of the positioning of the staircase and the distance between the scheme and the side boundary with 148 Warren Road. Also, drawings showing the flat roof area.

(5)          Councillor Cattell requested details in relation to the works permitted nearby in Channel View Road.

              Debate and Decision Making Process

(6)          Councillor Morris stated that having visited the site he considered that the scheme would in effect be two storey, and would have a negative impact.

(7)          Councillor Miller stated that was in agreement that properties in the area were of differing styles, with many having been altered significantly over the years and their being no prevailing style. He considered that the proposals were acceptable.

(8)          Councillor C Theobald stated that she considered that the existing on site building was a hotchpotch. The proposals would affect improvements and she supported that.

(9)          Councillor Hill stated that she considered that the scheme was too big for the site and concurred with the officer recommendation that it should be refused.

(10)       Councillor Mac Cafferty stated that whilst acknowledging the reasons put forward for refusal, in this instance he considered that the diversity of built form in the vicinity was such that the scheme was acceptable particularly as there were very similar properties nearby in the same road. Councillor Wealls was in agreement with that view.

(11)       Councillor Cattell, the Chair stated that exceptionally in this instance she was in agreement that in view of the similar development nearby and the configuration of the development that it would not adversely affect neighbouring amenity or have a negative impact on the street scene and that it would be appropriate for planning permission to be granted.

(12)       A vote was taken on the officer recommendation but was not carried on a vote of 4 to 7. Councillor Miller proposed that planning permission be granted contrary to the officer recommendation as the proposed works were not out of keeping with the street scene and there would be no detrimental impact on neighbouring properties. This was seconded by Councillor C Theobald. A recorded vote was then taken and Councillors Cattell (Chair), Gilbey (Deputy Chair), Bennett, Mac Cafferty, Miller, C Theobald and Wealls voted that planning permission be granted. Councillors Hill, Littman, Moonan and Morris voted that planning permission be refused. Therefore on a vote of 7 to 4 planning permission was granted.

33.6       RESOLVED – That the Committee has taken into consideration the reasons for the recommendation as set out in the report but resolves to GRANT planning permission as it is considered that the proposed works are not out of keeping with the street scene and there will be no detrimental impact on neighbouring properties.